NON-INVASIVE VENTILATION OUTCOMES AFTER EXTUBATION IN PRETERM NEONATES AT CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL 1

Hiếu Nghĩa Hà, Đức Toàn Nguyễn, Thị Thanh Tâm Phạm

Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: Currently, at Children's Hospital 1, there has not been any research to determine the profile of using NIV after tracheal extubation. Therefore, we conducted this study to describe the results of non-invasive ventilation after extubation in premature neonates at Children's Hospital 1. Methods: Cross-sectional study from February 2024 to July 2024 at Children's Hospital 1. Results: From February 2024 to July 2024, a total of 87 infants were included in the study after meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The median gestational age was 28.7 weeks (27.0; 32.3), and the median birth weight was 1300g (1000; 1800 g). Among the 87 infants extubated, 20 were in the NCPAP group, 60 in the NIPPV group, and 7 in the NHFOV group. The failure rate of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) within the first 7 days after extubation was 13.8%, with the NCPAP group showing a failure rate of 15%, higher than that of the NIPPV and NHFOV groups, which had failure rates of 13.3% and 14.3%, respectively. The main complication of NIV was nasal septal ulceration, occurring in approximately 8% of cases, and no cases of pneumothorax, necrotizing enterocolitis, or bowel perforation were recorded. Conclusion: The failure rate of non-invasive ventilation methods in preterm neonates within the first 7 days after extubation is 13.8%. Among these, the failure rate with NCPAP is higher compared to NIPPV and NHFOV. The primary complication associated with these methods is nasal septal ulceration, while other complications such as pneumothorax, necrotizing enterocolitis, and bowel perforation are less common. This indicates the safety of applying these treatments following extubation in premature infants.

Article Details

References

1. Cam Ngọc Phượng, “Kinh nghiệm bước đầu thở máy áp lực dương ngắt quãng qua mũi ở trẻ sanh non”, 2012
2. Masry et al., “Reintubation rates after extubation to different non-invasive ventilation modes in preterm infants,” BMC Pediatr, 21(1), 2021, pp. 1–12.
3. Giaccone, E. Jensen, P. Davis, and B. Schmidt, “Definitions of extubation success in very premature infants: a systematic review,” Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 99 (2), 2014.
4. M. Phatigomet, A. Thatrimontrichai, G. Maneenil, S. Dissaneevate, and W. Janjindamai, “Reintubation Rate between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation versus Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation in Neonates: A Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial,” Am J Perinatol, 41(11), 2024, pp. 1504–1511.
5. X. Zhu, H. Qi, Z. Feng, Y. Shi, and D. De Luca, “Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” JAMA Pediatr, 176 (6), 2022, pp. 551–559.